Dupont was better 20 years ago, but in the year before the bike lane was put in it was not particularly good for driving. The intersection with Annette and Dundas was always a bottleneck. There was two lanes but where the just east of the light where the road turns and dives down cars would always alternate effectively only going one at a time. The left lane would block with cars turning onto Osler, the right would block at Edwin and there was always some idiot trying to game the system by making 32 lane changes between Annette and Lansdowne.
People have the right to their opinions, but we need to consider all the facts as well.
I agree that car emissions are an important concern. I think when the rail path is extended downtown, it will likely draw significantly more cyclists and at that point the bike lane under the railway bridge is likely to become quite important for allowing a significant number of cyclists to get down town safely.
There are a couple people who honestly do feel this way. At the meeting they seemed to be in a minority, and other people had far more thoughtful answers. I think this was very frustrating to them. It can't be helped and as you know I am not always the most delicate with people's feelings. ;-) So, hopefully I haven't made things too much worse.
I think the best gauge of how many people support bikes in the immediate area is the existence of the bike pirates. I love them, but honestly I didn't exactly expect them to last very long. This is an extremely local business, you might travel for a good deal on a new bike but not for the DIY maintenance. Not only are they surviving but they are thriving. There are a lot of people in the immediate area who are riding bikes and care about cyclist safety.
However the religion of the automobile is strong and the people who need to believe the automobile is viable are very vocal.
Perhaps I could have done a quick summary earlier.
In the first half of the meeting people raised specific concerns about dangerous driving behaviour on residential streets. Many people appreciated the complexities of the fundamental problem.
Drivers on Edwin frequently drive on the sidewalk. At times like this weekend when there are highway closures, traffic on Bloor is insane, and drivers look to escape by ducking up Symington. In aggregate, these desperation moves really only slow things down, but it's inevitable. Traffic calming measures can't be used on Symington as it is a bus route.
Other streets are also being used as irrational escapes in some cases changes could be made, probably driving more traffic onto Symington.
Some causes of the increase in traffic include development on Keele both the new condo near Dundas and the massive development around St Clair. Development at Lansdowne four more buildings are in the works. Technically the Galleria development has already got most of the needed approvals so it could restart at any time.
More broadly there was a recent report that Toronto has the most tall buildings under construction of any city in the world.
The population density both locally and across the city is increasing dramatically. The lowest density form of transportation is the car that cars are squeezing each other off the road.
Finally someone opened the bike lane can of worms. I think there were two people who simply wanted Dupont bike lanes removed. One woman objected that she rode a bike and felt safer with the bike lanes. At the time she thought she might be the only one and seemed intimidated, but would soon find out she was far from alone. Another woman at the back was a friend of the cyclist who had been killed at the Dupont underpass and was there to remind us of the very real safety concerns addressed by the bike lanes.
An elderly gentleman suggested that cyclists could go up Keele and across the bike lane on Davenport. He was reminded that the Keele underpass is narrow very busy and dangerous, the route would also involve a level crossing. It really seemed that he had never thought about that. Another person tried to explain that hills are quite a bit more significant to cyclists.
An older woman in the front seemed to feel safety concerns of cyclists could be obliterated if cyclists were just given an assurance that drivers were really nice people, and that everybody could just get along. She didn't really pretend to understand the issue very well. She was adamant and quite determined that the bike lanes should be removed.
The two did seem frustrated. They seem to have expected their opinions would meet universal agreement, so they didn't need to research they arguments. They clearly had not considered the issues thoroughly.
Ana's position was that the lanes were put in without sufficient consultation and they should not be removed without a better consultation process. It sounds like there will be some kind of group to consider the issue.
Jeff your so called neighbours have a right to their opinions as much as you and others do, we live here too and I don't believe my neighbour is anti-bike. I would of agreeed with you both regarding Dupont street if I was new in the neighourhood, but I'm not. I seen how Dupont is now and how it was before and it's not the same. The bike lanes did change the flow of traffic, it wasn't this bad. The same goes with St. Clair after they narrowed the road..
The other thing bike lanes has not done was to discourage less cars on dupont. I TTC to work, but drive on weekends and during the day, not only do I see the traffic, i'm in it. To me Dupont is a mess and even more scary is the stories we hear from first responders, trying to get a fire truck through all that the traffic, when you have a stroke and heart attach time is everything??
I think the governemnt should take a closer look to see the effects idiling has on community like ours. The deadly emmisions(Carbon Monoxide) the cars spews out. We presently have traffic on Dupont to the N, Bloor to the S, Dundas to the W and soon Landowne to the W will have the same idiling problems as dupont. Guess who community is setting in the middle of all this, we are JT. Now you can see why some of your neighbours might be concerned. JF
Hey Jeff, remember 10 years ago, you never saw a bike around this area. Now look at it. New families and changing attitudes, cycling continues to grow around here. You cant go more than a few minutes without seeing a bike go by. Transportation planning used to mean cars but now it's "complete streets" where pedestrians, cyclists, public transit, and cars all have their place. As the cities develop car drivers eventually are forced to make a choice ---and it has nothing to do with bike lanes, its about whether you really need or can afford to drive everywhere.
I think you are correct, the issue is volume and the Dundas West/Annette/Dupont intersection doesnt help. Remember most of that traffic is headed to one location; stores at Keele and St. Clair. It was the arterial speedway of Dupont that helped kill stores and jobs and taking back Dupont for locals may help bring back our local economy to what it once was. With intensification we are seeing the new Dominion store and the Shoppers on Dundas and more so the process of moving to complete streets is under way whether some people get it or not. Local businesses are now using Railpath to bike power coffee and food deliveries. If you want to live like the 1970's then life is going to get harder year after year.
Is this post for real? Bike lanes are causing traffic delays?! Traffic is heavy on Dupont because it's an east-west artery across a heavily populated part of town. The slow traffic lights at Dundas West/Annette/Dupont don't help either.
If bike lanes were causing traffic jams around here, Annette would be terrible to drive on but Annette's typically quiet. Harbord is a pleasure to drive on... bike lanes there too... Hallam, Davenport... the list goes on. Bike lanes encourage people to bike and in turn, there's less cars on the road.
If this anti-bike lane sentiment is honestly how people in JT feel, I'm disappointed in my neighbours.
Dupont is not bumper to bumper 7 to 7, that is a huge exaggeration. It is tied up at rush hours, including noon just like Bloor is. In fact Dupont mirrors the other arterial roads in our area, none of which have bike lanes. I think some of the additional traffic on Dupont is spillage coming up from Bloor.
It is worth noting that before the bike lanes on Dupont there was parking on both sides of the street for most of the day so in fact nothing has really changed for most of the day. If you look at Dupont east of Dufferin where there are no bike lanes you will notice that it is usually jammed in rush hour too. The real issue is too many cars.
As St. Clair and Keele have developed there has been a steady increase on Dupont, Davenport, St. Clair, and Bloor as more and more people shop there. As well, overall, there has been a fair amount of new development along these routes especially on Dupont east of Dufferin. Basically more cars; most of which are only traveling through.With or without bike lanes there would be more cars and there reaches a point where you cannot fit any more cars and you have a traffic jam. Every traffic theory known shows that increased road capacity brings more cars until people want more capacity again. It is insatiable and eventually like all larger cities public transit becomes the only answer. The much talked about "downtown relief line" would go a long way to making it easier to keep your car at home but the reality is that if you want to drive in a modern large city during rush hour, expect delays.
The intersection at Bloor and Symington is on the radar for the traffic study, the Ward 18 Corridor Study, and the Castlepoint Development traffic study. Those lights were installed in the 1970's because a boy was run over crossing Bloor. Fortunately the Boys and Girls Club has staff to walk the kids through the intersection at least on the way there. Because of all the development that is going happen around there there will have to be some improvements to that intersection and I can see Sterling Road eventually connecting with Ruttan Street (which I think is already a City plan).
This post will also be sent to Anna's office as well.
I was told by my neighbour that she was disappointed with the way the local Traffic Plan meeting went that was held at Perth School the other night. She was most annoyed by some people asking for more bike lanes in an area that is already bumper to bumper traffic, specially DuPont street, caused by the bike lanes. Traffic that is non-stop from 7am-7pm.
We hear about people been concern with diesel trains and the health risk associated with that, asking for clean electric train, yet we have a health problem that exist in ward18/JT as we speak caused by co2 pollution. I think this is real issue, yet we pretend that it's doesn't exist, so we ask for more bike lanes. Hello, the lights are on but no one is home. We need more bike like we need a hole in our heads. I know Anna is smart enough to know this is not a smart direction to go.
The other issue is the crazy and dangerous intersection of Symington and Bloor and soon to be crossed daily by the community kids who will be attending the new Boys and Girls club. This is an issue we should be addressing and not more bike lanes.
I was in Bending The Rails. Overall the problem is that the ARL plan is a bad plan from a commuter and taxpayer point of view. I sat tonight with a rail consultant who said that governments never think long term, they always think that somebody else will pay/deal with mistakes down the road. Its the way they operate. So instead of taking a bit more time to build a system that serves more people and generates more revenue and pollutes less we will get a system that will need to be redone within years. Metrolinx's own documents and studies show this so it really comes down to government. This consultant said that a minority government might be the only factor that can come into play. I suggest continued pressure on the federal and provincial members, they got elected on this issue.
I attended the meeting at Bloor Collegiate. Crossing the railway barrier was a big issue, particularly extending the West Toronto Rail Path east across the Barrie line.
This year Toronto quickly constructed 2 new level rail crossings near the Finch rail corridor for bikes & pedestrians at minimal expense. The trail first crosses the Barrie line and then the Stouffvile line, both are owned by Metrolinx.
Barrie line crossing between Dufferin & Keele. http://www.toronto.ca/cycling/public-consultations/pdf/rinc5/2010-04-16_...
Proposed MetrolinxRail Crossing at Shell storage facility
• Existing TTC transitwaycrossing location to be utilized
• Proposed new signal system at this location
(the YU transitway will be removed when the subway extension opens but the path is permanent)
The planner noted that CN (Metrolinx) would object to a level crossing (or a tunnel or bridge). Understandable since neither Metrolinx, CN or CP have local travel in their mandate, and consider crossings as an unwanted intrusion. Crossings will only happen if pols demand it, apply pressure and possibly even the threat or an actual appeal to the fed transport board which they would likely win. Still a tiny fraction of the time & cost of inconvenient bridges or tunnels.
The two level crossings were likely built because (a) the Ford admin wants to show progress and hopes off street trails will keep bikes away from cars and (b) the attached Canadian and Provincial funding had time limits. This pressure quickly rolled over inertia, excuses & red tape.
Unfortunately the Georgetown corridor is no longer an option because the Feds added a regulation to eliminate all level crossings before the air-rail link begins.
Now mag level crossings JT, LV http://www.nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=157816
The ARL trains will be smaller self propelled cars (DMU's) but the unknown factor is the Tier 4 technology. When it becomes available (another unknown) there is speculation that it will be much louder than the current Tier 2 units and it will also make the trains heavier. It's the large GO locomotives that will be the bigger polluters (per engine) and noisemakers that the ARL trains, regardless of which Tier they are. Both pollute far more than electric of course.
Jeff
One thing about the ARL trains that Cleantrain/etc. neglect to mention is that these trains are MUCH smaller than a GO train, and should therefore be much quieter. It's not like we'll have 7 GO trains passing by every hour (though GO service will be increasing too....)
I'd be curious to hear noise level stats about each type, actually. Especially when it comes to acceleration from the Bloor GO/ARL station.
Scott and Anonymous, you both make very good points regarding the state of the former commercial lands. With regards to the trains - I've lived by the Lakeshore West corridor for over a decade and am very much used to GO and VIA noise, however it seems that the increase in traffic being proposed for the Georgetown corridor will be something on a much bigger scale (7 trains an hour, etc.). The diesel vs electric issue remains unresolved and in fact it seems that we will not see the electric trains that so many people, including residents of your community and campaigning for. It's both encouraging and concerning to see how hard people are having to fight on this issue (The 'Bending the Rails' documentary/campign, the protest walks held in your community). What do you guys think will be the impact of these impending changes and do they worry you, especially from a a pollution perspective?
The City does not do soil tests because in general most homes in the city were at one time sitting on land that had pollution or were next to it (air pollution doesn't always stay on site). Some of Toronto's priciest areas are built on polluted industrial fill or consider Harbourtfront.For former brownfields like Glidden it is the MOE who regulates and sets standards when a zoning conversion happens. Remediation is a far better step than mere maintenance which means that the Glidden site and the Rio Tinto site to the south are in much better shape today than they were 5 years ago. Rather than just filter out pollutants, they are being nullified without creating toxic landfill to be dumped somewhere else. Two of the major issues in the area up until the early 80's were illegal chemical spills into the sewer system and air pollution but those issues receded as industry moved away.
Residual groundwater contamination, while a bad thing, does not directly affect homes (who dont use wells) if the ground cover to the water table has been cleaned. So yes there will probably be some contamination deep down for some years to come but the soil that effects people above ground will have no impact. In fact the soil at the Glidden site, which had a very involved cleaning, is probably cleaner than the soil in my backyard.
As you say, there are many more pressing health issues that may affect people in the city such as background pollution (not from one single source) that creates more and more smog days and noise. Junction Triangle though is undergoing a renewal that you can see pretty much where ever you look.
There's always a hope that the gov't will move toward electric trains sooner than planned. If noise is your concern, the units on Elsie Lane are pretty well buffered by the Lofts next to the bridge, I only hear it as background noise when the windows are open.
The issue with the Glidden site, in my opinion, is not a huge concern. The soil went through a full remediation about 2 years ago and while that doesn't guarantee there are no lingering contaminants, the new development would have to prove the soil was clean for their bank before they could start digging. That might be overly optimistic to some, but, the reality is that large numbers of city houses sit on lands that were occupied in a past life by something environmentally unfriendly. If that were the standard for determining where to buy a house, living in the city wouldn't be an option for you. The reality is that there are a number of other things in our daily lives that would affect you more than the soil on those lands.
For what it's worth, the neighbourhood is developing, the people are friendly and the convenience provided by the amenities within walking distance all make it a great place to live.
Many thanks, Vic and anonymous. It's nice to see that your community is quite involved and cares about the neighbourhood, as evidenced by this website.
I'm very interested in the area, but since discovering your website I've been reading up on two things which give me pause; 1) the major expansion of train services along the Georgetown corridor including the airport link (http://www.cleantrain.ca, http://www.gotransit.com/gts/en/default.aspx), and 2) the potentially contaminated state of land in the area as a result of years of operation of the Gildden Paints and Varnishes factory site. As the former looks like an inevitability and the latter a potentially dangerous mystery, what do you guys as residents of the area think about these issues?
The area across the street from Elsie Lane (362 / 370 Wallace Ave.) has a development proposal being worked on right now. A mix of stacked towns, and some commercial properties along the western edge / Railpath. There's a discussion forum about that property here and some notes from the July 26th meeting here.
I live on Elsie Lane and have been there for a year the train noise is minimal I cannot hear the trains with the windows closed. The area is clean and quiet and we've had no issues since moving in. My understanding is the grass area oppisite is due to be another set of townhouses but I did hear they are from a highend builder which would only add to the areas development.
We love the area everything is so convenient and within walking distance and the residence at Brownstones are very friendly
Very impressed to see all these commenters embracing high density development.
I was also very surprised that the OMB nixed the Giraffe. What is the latest with that corner?
Its been mentioned here before but the Crossways was built using some loopholes that were closed after it's construction in 1974. It is probably one of the worst "Brutalist" designs ever built and killed local street level activity. I am sure that it's current residents would love a revitalized Dundas and Bloor with more life and more stores. Density will help make that happen.
Ms. Baichwal, I live across the road from you - above the dentists on the SW corner. Your building blocks my view, should it be torn down? Honestly, the Crossways is an ugly eyesore of a building. (as is my building)
We need more density. We needed the Giraffe building. The proposed development would be north of you and would only block north views, not East, South or West views... which are arguable the nicest views available.
This area is in desperate need of redevelopment. Any responsible development that brings new construction and affordable condo's to the area should be welcomed. Let's not kill another opportunity for renters to become home owners in this area. It's fast become a place for the wealthy, double income people who can afford the absurd prices of the homes in this area.
It's the perfect place for a large tower and the new business, jobs and homes that it will bring will be a wonderful addition to the community.
We are currently working with the councillor's office to change some parking situations around St. Seb's school because they are no longer working. Maybe you can have the 1 hour thing dropped. I think that was in place when the building was a lumber yard.
I run a shared work space for entrepreneurs/startups/freelancers etc. @ 231 Wallace. A couple of my previous tenants could really have used this info -- they were in a jam about where to leave their kid during the day.
I'm just speaking as a business owner here; we should really have longer-term parking on Wallace Avenue in front of the new lofts (coincidentally, my office is there). Right now it's only 1-hour parking which is frustrating for visitors, clients, everyone associated with the Hackernest.
Just venting, I figured I could safely do that in a parking-related topic :)
Dupont was better 20 years ago, but in the year before the bike lane was put in it was not particularly good for driving. The intersection with Annette and Dundas was always a bottleneck. There was two lanes but where the just east of the light where the road turns and dives down cars would always alternate effectively only going one at a time. The left lane would block with cars turning onto Osler, the right would block at Edwin and there was always some idiot trying to game the system by making 32 lane changes between Annette and Lansdowne.
People have the right to their opinions, but we need to consider all the facts as well.
I agree that car emissions are an important concern. I think when the rail path is extended downtown, it will likely draw significantly more cyclists and at that point the bike lane under the railway bridge is likely to become quite important for allowing a significant number of cyclists to get down town safely.
There are a couple people who honestly do feel this way. At the meeting they seemed to be in a minority, and other people had far more thoughtful answers. I think this was very frustrating to them. It can't be helped and as you know I am not always the most delicate with people's feelings. ;-) So, hopefully I haven't made things too much worse.
I think the best gauge of how many people support bikes in the immediate area is the existence of the bike pirates. I love them, but honestly I didn't exactly expect them to last very long. This is an extremely local business, you might travel for a good deal on a new bike but not for the DIY maintenance. Not only are they surviving but they are thriving. There are a lot of people in the immediate area who are riding bikes and care about cyclist safety.
However the religion of the automobile is strong and the people who need to believe the automobile is viable are very vocal.
Perhaps I could have done a quick summary earlier.
In the first half of the meeting people raised specific concerns about dangerous driving behaviour on residential streets. Many people appreciated the complexities of the fundamental problem.
Drivers on Edwin frequently drive on the sidewalk. At times like this weekend when there are highway closures, traffic on Bloor is insane, and drivers look to escape by ducking up Symington. In aggregate, these desperation moves really only slow things down, but it's inevitable. Traffic calming measures can't be used on Symington as it is a bus route.
Other streets are also being used as irrational escapes in some cases changes could be made, probably driving more traffic onto Symington.
Some causes of the increase in traffic include development on Keele both the new condo near Dundas and the massive development around St Clair. Development at Lansdowne four more buildings are in the works. Technically the Galleria development has already got most of the needed approvals so it could restart at any time.
More broadly there was a recent report that Toronto has the most tall buildings under construction of any city in the world.
The population density both locally and across the city is increasing dramatically. The lowest density form of transportation is the car that cars are squeezing each other off the road.
Finally someone opened the bike lane can of worms. I think there were two people who simply wanted Dupont bike lanes removed. One woman objected that she rode a bike and felt safer with the bike lanes. At the time she thought she might be the only one and seemed intimidated, but would soon find out she was far from alone. Another woman at the back was a friend of the cyclist who had been killed at the Dupont underpass and was there to remind us of the very real safety concerns addressed by the bike lanes.
An elderly gentleman suggested that cyclists could go up Keele and across the bike lane on Davenport. He was reminded that the Keele underpass is narrow very busy and dangerous, the route would also involve a level crossing. It really seemed that he had never thought about that. Another person tried to explain that hills are quite a bit more significant to cyclists.
An older woman in the front seemed to feel safety concerns of cyclists could be obliterated if cyclists were just given an assurance that drivers were really nice people, and that everybody could just get along. She didn't really pretend to understand the issue very well. She was adamant and quite determined that the bike lanes should be removed.
The two did seem frustrated. They seem to have expected their opinions would meet universal agreement, so they didn't need to research they arguments. They clearly had not considered the issues thoroughly.
Ana's position was that the lanes were put in without sufficient consultation and they should not be removed without a better consultation process. It sounds like there will be some kind of group to consider the issue.
Jeff your so called neighbours have a right to their opinions as much as you and others do, we live here too and I don't believe my neighbour is anti-bike. I would of agreeed with you both regarding Dupont street if I was new in the neighourhood, but I'm not. I seen how Dupont is now and how it was before and it's not the same. The bike lanes did change the flow of traffic, it wasn't this bad. The same goes with St. Clair after they narrowed the road..
The other thing bike lanes has not done was to discourage less cars on dupont. I TTC to work, but drive on weekends and during the day, not only do I see the traffic, i'm in it. To me Dupont is a mess and even more scary is the stories we hear from first responders, trying to get a fire truck through all that the traffic, when you have a stroke and heart attach time is everything??
I think the governemnt should take a closer look to see the effects idiling has on community like ours. The deadly emmisions(Carbon Monoxide) the cars spews out. We presently have traffic on Dupont to the N, Bloor to the S, Dundas to the W and soon Landowne to the W will have the same idiling problems as dupont. Guess who community is setting in the middle of all this, we are JT. Now you can see why some of your neighbours might be concerned. JF
Hey Jeff, remember 10 years ago, you never saw a bike around this area. Now look at it. New families and changing attitudes, cycling continues to grow around here. You cant go more than a few minutes without seeing a bike go by. Transportation planning used to mean cars but now it's "complete streets" where pedestrians, cyclists, public transit, and cars all have their place. As the cities develop car drivers eventually are forced to make a choice ---and it has nothing to do with bike lanes, its about whether you really need or can afford to drive everywhere.
I think you are correct, the issue is volume and the Dundas West/Annette/Dupont intersection doesnt help. Remember most of that traffic is headed to one location; stores at Keele and St. Clair. It was the arterial speedway of Dupont that helped kill stores and jobs and taking back Dupont for locals may help bring back our local economy to what it once was. With intensification we are seeing the new Dominion store and the Shoppers on Dundas and more so the process of moving to complete streets is under way whether some people get it or not. Local businesses are now using Railpath to bike power coffee and food deliveries. If you want to live like the 1970's then life is going to get harder year after year.
Is this post for real? Bike lanes are causing traffic delays?! Traffic is heavy on Dupont because it's an east-west artery across a heavily populated part of town. The slow traffic lights at Dundas West/Annette/Dupont don't help either.
If bike lanes were causing traffic jams around here, Annette would be terrible to drive on but Annette's typically quiet. Harbord is a pleasure to drive on... bike lanes there too... Hallam, Davenport... the list goes on. Bike lanes encourage people to bike and in turn, there's less cars on the road.
If this anti-bike lane sentiment is honestly how people in JT feel, I'm disappointed in my neighbours.
Dupont is not bumper to bumper 7 to 7, that is a huge exaggeration. It is tied up at rush hours, including noon just like Bloor is. In fact Dupont mirrors the other arterial roads in our area, none of which have bike lanes. I think some of the additional traffic on Dupont is spillage coming up from Bloor.
It is worth noting that before the bike lanes on Dupont there was parking on both sides of the street for most of the day so in fact nothing has really changed for most of the day. If you look at Dupont east of Dufferin where there are no bike lanes you will notice that it is usually jammed in rush hour too. The real issue is too many cars.
As St. Clair and Keele have developed there has been a steady increase on Dupont, Davenport, St. Clair, and Bloor as more and more people shop there. As well, overall, there has been a fair amount of new development along these routes especially on Dupont east of Dufferin. Basically more cars; most of which are only traveling through.With or without bike lanes there would be more cars and there reaches a point where you cannot fit any more cars and you have a traffic jam. Every traffic theory known shows that increased road capacity brings more cars until people want more capacity again. It is insatiable and eventually like all larger cities public transit becomes the only answer. The much talked about "downtown relief line" would go a long way to making it easier to keep your car at home but the reality is that if you want to drive in a modern large city during rush hour, expect delays.
The intersection at Bloor and Symington is on the radar for the traffic study, the Ward 18 Corridor Study, and the Castlepoint Development traffic study. Those lights were installed in the 1970's because a boy was run over crossing Bloor. Fortunately the Boys and Girls Club has staff to walk the kids through the intersection at least on the way there. Because of all the development that is going happen around there there will have to be some improvements to that intersection and I can see Sterling Road eventually connecting with Ruttan Street (which I think is already a City plan).
From Jack Fava:
This post will also be sent to Anna's office as well.
I was told by my neighbour that she was disappointed with the way the local Traffic Plan meeting went that was held at Perth School the other night. She was most annoyed by some people asking for more bike lanes in an area that is already bumper to bumper traffic, specially DuPont street, caused by the bike lanes. Traffic that is non-stop from 7am-7pm.
We hear about people been concern with diesel trains and the health risk associated with that, asking for clean electric train, yet we have a health problem that exist in ward18/JT as we speak caused by co2 pollution. I think this is real issue, yet we pretend that it's doesn't exist, so we ask for more bike lanes. Hello, the lights are on but no one is home. We need more bike like we need a hole in our heads. I know Anna is smart enough to know this is not a smart direction to go.
The other issue is the crazy and dangerous intersection of Symington and Bloor and soon to be crossed daily by the community kids who will be attending the new Boys and Girls club. This is an issue we should be addressing and not more bike lanes.
I was in Bending The Rails. Overall the problem is that the ARL plan is a bad plan from a commuter and taxpayer point of view. I sat tonight with a rail consultant who said that governments never think long term, they always think that somebody else will pay/deal with mistakes down the road. Its the way they operate. So instead of taking a bit more time to build a system that serves more people and generates more revenue and pollutes less we will get a system that will need to be redone within years. Metrolinx's own documents and studies show this so it really comes down to government. This consultant said that a minority government might be the only factor that can come into play. I suggest continued pressure on the federal and provincial members, they got elected on this issue.
I attended the meeting at Bloor Collegiate. Crossing the railway barrier was a big issue, particularly extending the West Toronto Rail Path east across the Barrie line.
This year Toronto quickly constructed 2 new level rail crossings near the Finch rail corridor for bikes & pedestrians at minimal expense. The trail first crosses the Barrie line and then the Stouffvile line, both are owned by Metrolinx.
Barrie line crossing between Dufferin & Keele.
http://www.toronto.ca/cycling/public-consultations/pdf/rinc5/2010-04-16_...
Proposed MetrolinxRail Crossing at Shell storage facility
• Existing TTC transitwaycrossing location to be utilized
• Proposed new signal system at this location
(the YU transitway will be removed when the subway extension opens but the path is permanent)
Stouffville line crossing between Kennedy & Midland (south of McNicholl Road level crossing).
http://www.toronto.ca/improvements/pdf/notice_10SC-20RD-RInC7A_3.pdf
The planner noted that CN (Metrolinx) would object to a level crossing (or a tunnel or bridge). Understandable since neither Metrolinx, CN or CP have local travel in their mandate, and consider crossings as an unwanted intrusion. Crossings will only happen if pols demand it, apply pressure and possibly even the threat or an actual appeal to the fed transport board which they would likely win. Still a tiny fraction of the time & cost of inconvenient bridges or tunnels.
The two level crossings were likely built because (a) the Ford admin wants to show progress and hopes off street trails will keep bikes away from cars and (b) the attached Canadian and Provincial funding had time limits. This pressure quickly rolled over inertia, excuses & red tape.
Unfortunately the Georgetown corridor is no longer an option because the Feds added a regulation to eliminate all level crossings before the air-rail link begins.
Now mag level crossings JT, LV
http://www.nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=157816
The ARL trains will be smaller self propelled cars (DMU's) but the unknown factor is the Tier 4 technology. When it becomes available (another unknown) there is speculation that it will be much louder than the current Tier 2 units and it will also make the trains heavier. It's the large GO locomotives that will be the bigger polluters (per engine) and noisemakers that the ARL trains, regardless of which Tier they are. Both pollute far more than electric of course.
Jeff
One thing about the ARL trains that Cleantrain/etc. neglect to mention is that these trains are MUCH smaller than a GO train, and should therefore be much quieter. It's not like we'll have 7 GO trains passing by every hour (though GO service will be increasing too....)
I'd be curious to hear noise level stats about each type, actually. Especially when it comes to acceleration from the Bloor GO/ARL station.
Scott and Anonymous, you both make very good points regarding the state of the former commercial lands. With regards to the trains - I've lived by the Lakeshore West corridor for over a decade and am very much used to GO and VIA noise, however it seems that the increase in traffic being proposed for the Georgetown corridor will be something on a much bigger scale (7 trains an hour, etc.). The diesel vs electric issue remains unresolved and in fact it seems that we will not see the electric trains that so many people, including residents of your community and campaigning for. It's both encouraging and concerning to see how hard people are having to fight on this issue (The 'Bending the Rails' documentary/campign, the protest walks held in your community). What do you guys think will be the impact of these impending changes and do they worry you, especially from a a pollution perspective?
The City does not do soil tests because in general most homes in the city were at one time sitting on land that had pollution or were next to it (air pollution doesn't always stay on site). Some of Toronto's priciest areas are built on polluted industrial fill or consider Harbourtfront.For former brownfields like Glidden it is the MOE who regulates and sets standards when a zoning conversion happens. Remediation is a far better step than mere maintenance which means that the Glidden site and the Rio Tinto site to the south are in much better shape today than they were 5 years ago. Rather than just filter out pollutants, they are being nullified without creating toxic landfill to be dumped somewhere else. Two of the major issues in the area up until the early 80's were illegal chemical spills into the sewer system and air pollution but those issues receded as industry moved away.
Residual groundwater contamination, while a bad thing, does not directly affect homes (who dont use wells) if the ground cover to the water table has been cleaned. So yes there will probably be some contamination deep down for some years to come but the soil that effects people above ground will have no impact. In fact the soil at the Glidden site, which had a very involved cleaning, is probably cleaner than the soil in my backyard.
As you say, there are many more pressing health issues that may affect people in the city such as background pollution (not from one single source) that creates more and more smog days and noise. Junction Triangle though is undergoing a renewal that you can see pretty much where ever you look.
There's always a hope that the gov't will move toward electric trains sooner than planned. If noise is your concern, the units on Elsie Lane are pretty well buffered by the Lofts next to the bridge, I only hear it as background noise when the windows are open.
The issue with the Glidden site, in my opinion, is not a huge concern. The soil went through a full remediation about 2 years ago and while that doesn't guarantee there are no lingering contaminants, the new development would have to prove the soil was clean for their bank before they could start digging. That might be overly optimistic to some, but, the reality is that large numbers of city houses sit on lands that were occupied in a past life by something environmentally unfriendly. If that were the standard for determining where to buy a house, living in the city wouldn't be an option for you. The reality is that there are a number of other things in our daily lives that would affect you more than the soil on those lands.
For what it's worth, the neighbourhood is developing, the people are friendly and the convenience provided by the amenities within walking distance all make it a great place to live.
Many thanks, Vic and anonymous. It's nice to see that your community is quite involved and cares about the neighbourhood, as evidenced by this website.
I'm very interested in the area, but since discovering your website I've been reading up on two things which give me pause; 1) the major expansion of train services along the Georgetown corridor including the airport link (http://www.cleantrain.ca, http://www.gotransit.com/gts/en/default.aspx), and 2) the potentially contaminated state of land in the area as a result of years of operation of the Gildden Paints and Varnishes factory site. As the former looks like an inevitability and the latter a potentially dangerous mystery, what do you guys as residents of the area think about these issues?
The Star: Heap’s legacy: Inspiring the next generation http://bit.ly/q5EN1c
Hi,
The area across the street from Elsie Lane (362 / 370 Wallace Ave.) has a development proposal being worked on right now. A mix of stacked towns, and some commercial properties along the western edge / Railpath. There's a discussion forum about that property here and some notes from the July 26th meeting here.
Cheers,
Vic
Hello
I live on Elsie Lane and have been there for a year the train noise is minimal I cannot hear the trains with the windows closed. The area is clean and quiet and we've had no issues since moving in. My understanding is the grass area oppisite is due to be another set of townhouses but I did hear they are from a highend builder which would only add to the areas development.
We love the area everything is so convenient and within walking distance and the residence at Brownstones are very friendly
Hope that helps
Very impressed to see all these commenters embracing high density development.
I was also very surprised that the OMB nixed the Giraffe. What is the latest with that corner?
Its been mentioned here before but the Crossways was built using some loopholes that were closed after it's construction in 1974. It is probably one of the worst "Brutalist" designs ever built and killed local street level activity. I am sure that it's current residents would love a revitalized Dundas and Bloor with more life and more stores. Density will help make that happen.
Ms. Baichwal, I live across the road from you - above the dentists on the SW corner. Your building blocks my view, should it be torn down? Honestly, the Crossways is an ugly eyesore of a building. (as is my building)
We need more density. We needed the Giraffe building. The proposed development would be north of you and would only block north views, not East, South or West views... which are arguable the nicest views available.
This area is in desperate need of redevelopment. Any responsible development that brings new construction and affordable condo's to the area should be welcomed. Let's not kill another opportunity for renters to become home owners in this area. It's fast become a place for the wealthy, double income people who can afford the absurd prices of the homes in this area.
It's the perfect place for a large tower and the new business, jobs and homes that it will bring will be a wonderful addition to the community.
We are currently working with the councillor's office to change some parking situations around St. Seb's school because they are no longer working. Maybe you can have the 1 hour thing dropped. I think that was in place when the building was a lumber yard.
I run a shared work space for entrepreneurs/startups/freelancers etc. @ 231 Wallace. A couple of my previous tenants could really have used this info -- they were in a jam about where to leave their kid during the day.
Ah, c'est la vie!
I'm just speaking as a business owner here; we should really have longer-term parking on Wallace Avenue in front of the new lofts (coincidentally, my office is there). Right now it's only 1-hour parking which is frustrating for visitors, clients, everyone associated with the Hackernest.
Just venting, I figured I could safely do that in a parking-related topic :)